The

Public
Schools
of
Brookline

ENGLISH
LANGUAGE
LEARNER
Program
Review

Phase
I
Report

June
4,
2009

Mindy
Paulo,
K-12
ELL
Program
Coordinator
Amy
Martin,
Director
of
Program
Review
and
Grants
The
ELL
Program
Review
Committee
ELL
Program
Review
-
Phase
I
Report

Executive
Summary
page
2

PART
I
Process
Overview

A.
Overview
of
the
Program
Review
Process
in
Brookline
-
page
4

B.
The
ELL
Program
Review
Committee
-
page
5

C.
Phase
I
Process
-
page
6

D.
Phase
I
Process
Updates
and
Evaluation
page
8

PART
II
Phase
I
Findings

A.
ELL
Program
Overview
page
9

B.
ELL
Program
Vision
and
Mission
page
10

C.
Areas
of
Program
Strength
and
Areas
for
Program
Improvement
-
page
12

1.
Instructional
Services
page
13
2.
Culture
and
Community
page
22

PART
III
Information/Data
Sources
page
26

PART
IV
-
Appendices

Appendix
a
Executive
Summary
from
Report
by
Dr.
Julie
Coppola
page
31
Appendix
b
AMAO
Report
page
35
Appendix
c
-
FTEs
and
Student
Enrollment
page
37
Appendix
d
ELL
Program
Funding
over
Time
page
39
Appendix
e
ELL
MCAS
Performance
page
41

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
ELL
Program
Review
Phase
I
-
Executive
Summary

The
ELL
Program
Review
Committee
convened
in
September
2008,
and
met
regularly
throughout
the
school
year.
The
committee
had
three
major
tasks:

1.
Gather
and
review
information
and
data
about
the
ELL
Program.
2.
Develop
a
vision
for
the
ELL
Program
in
Brookline.
3.
Determine
areas
of
program
strength
and
areas
for
program
improvement,
relative
to
the
vision,
based
on
the
data
findings.
This
report
details
the
process
and
outcomes
of
the
committee s
work.
The
findings
are
summarized
below.

Program
Vision

It
is
our
vision
that
English
language
learners
understand,
speak,
read,
and
write
English
fluently
and
competently
in
order
to
succeed
academically
and
socially
in
their
classrooms,
schools,
and
communities
at
large.
Students
acquire
the
linguistic
and
cultural
knowledge
to
function
effectively
globally.

Instructional
Services
-
Summary
of
Strengths

Brookline
ELL
students
perform
well
on
the
Massachusetts
English
Language
Proficiency
Assessment
(MEPA)
and
perform
well
on
Math
MCAS
exams.
The
ELL
staff
is
experienced
and
highly
qualified.
Program
processes
around
identification,
entrance/exit
screenings,
and
placement
assessment
are
efficient
and
effective.
The
program
model
is
flexible
and
allows
all
identified
students
to
receive
services,
including:
o
Grouping
by
language
proficiency
at
Brookline
High
School
o
Small
group,
individualized
instruction
using
pull-
out
services
in
grades
K-
8
o
Integration
with
native
speakers
o
English
language
development
is
taught
through
content
o
Sheltered
English
Immersion
(SEI)
classes
at
BHS.
Instruction
is
supported
by
a
range
of
available
curriculum
materials.
FLEP
students
are
monitored
for
two
years
after
exiting
the
program.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Instructional
Services
-
Summary
of
Areas
for
Improvement

Brookline
is
just
beginning
to
provide
adequate
SEI
training
for
classroom
teachers;
only
a
small
percentage
have
completed
one
or
more
categories
of
training.
Course
options
for
ELL
students
at
BHS
are
limited
due
to
student
and
school
schedules,
and
the
limited
number
of
SEI
classes.
Students
do
not
receive
services
for
the
recommended
number
of
hours
per
week
or
are
not
always
placed
in
proficiency-
based
instructional
groups
due
to
a
fixed
number
of
teacher
hours,
scheduling
limitations,
and
increasing
numbers
of
students,
which
result
in
higher
caseloads
for
all
ELL
teachers.
Teaching
spaces
are
not
always
conducive
to
effective
instruction.
(Class
sizes,
activities
and
grouping
options
are
limited.
)
ELL
teachers
and
classroom
teachers
do
not
have
sufficient
time
to
meet
and
co-
plan
instruction.
Culture
and
Community
-
Summary
of
Strengths

The
ELL
program
has
a
positive
impact
on
school
culture
for
ELL
families;
they
feel
welcomed
and
supported,
and
that
their
culture
is
valued.
ELL
students
and
families
are
integrated
socially
and
academically
into
the
life
of
the
school
through
the
ELL
program
The
Native
Language
Support
Programs
(i.e.
Korean-
ELL)
create
a
network
of
support
for
students
and
their
families.
The
ELL
program
staff
spends
time
and
effort
linking
families
to
resources
that
help
them
adjust
to
life
in
Brookline
and
to
their
school
community.
The
ELL
program
collaborates
with
librarians
and
content
area
coordinators
to
ensure
books
and
resources
about
ELL
students
cultures
are
available.
Culture
and
Community
-
Summary
of
Areas
for
Improvement

Some
cultures
are
not
represented
in
the
school
environment
or
reflected
in
the
curriculum
materials.
Information
about
the
ELL
program
and
the
school
is
not
equally
available
to
all
families.
Information
about
ELL
students
prior
educational
experiences
is
not
readily
available
to
ELL
teachers.
The
committee
will
reconvene
in
September
of
2009
to
begin
working
on
Phase
II
of
the
Program
Review
process
developing
a
plan
to
address
the
identified
areas
for
program
improvement.

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Part
I:
Process
Overview

A.
Overview
of
the
Program
Review
Process
in
Brookline
The
Public
Schools
of
Brookline
is
committed
to
the
continuous
improvement
of
all
programs
and
curriculum
areas.
Historically,
there
have
been
different
procedures
in
place
for
examining
our
programs
and
student
achievement.
Beginning
in
September
of
2004,
a
new
process
was
established
to
provide
a
comprehensive
and
rigorous
examination
of
our
programs
with
the
goal
of
improving
student
achievement.
This
process,
Program
Review,
is
now
in
its
fourth
year.
The
process
requires
the
use
of
established
evaluation
methods
to
measure
the
quality
of
our
school
programs
and
to
determine
strategies
for
continuous
improvement.
A
committee,
whose
members
represent
stakeholders
across
the
district,
examines
the
program
through
a
four
phase
process,
briefly
described
below:

Phase
I:
Study
Assess
the
current
state
of
the
program
with
the
assistance
of
an
outside
data
gatherer.
Create
a
vision
for
the
future
with
stakeholder
input.
Determine
areas
of
strength
and
areas
for
improvement
and
begin
to
plan
how
to
address
them.
Phase
II:
Plan
Create
a
plan
to
address
the
areas
for
growth
and
improvement.
Define
resources
and
determine
available
funding.
Phase
III:
Implement
Put
the
plan
(strategies/actions
for
continuous
improvement)
into
place
with
adequate
resources
and
professional
development.
Phase
IV:
Review
Review
the
process.
Check
on
the
progress
of
the
implementation
plans.
Collect
data
on
the
indicators
of
success.
Program
review
updates
are
provided
regularly
to
the
Deputy
Superintendent
for
Teaching
and
Learning,
who
communicates
progress
to
the
Curriculum
Subcommittee
of
the
School
Committee.
Detailed
information
on
Program
Review
process
can
be
found
on
the
Teaching
and
Learning
page
of
the
Public
Schools
of
Brookline
website:
www.brookline.k12.ma.us

The
English
Language
Learner
Program
began
the
Program
Review
Process
in
September
of
2008.
This
report
documents
the
findings
from
Phase
I
of
the
review
process.

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
B.
The
English
Language
Learner
Program
Review
Committee
A
Program
Review
Committee
is
responsible
for
collaboratively
working
through
the
Program
Review
process.
The
committee
is
comprised
of
approximately
twelve
to
fifteen
members
selected
from
within
the
school
system
and
from
the
broader
Brookline
community:
teachers,
parents,
administrators,
and
any
other
individuals
whose
input
is
considered
uniquely
important
to
the
process.
Committees
are
co-
chaired
by
the
Director
of
Program
Review
and
the
Curriculum/Program
Coordinators
for
the
program
under
review.
More
information
about
the
committee
members
roles
and
responsibilities
can
be
found
on
the
Teaching
and
Learning
webpage
of
the
PSB
website.

Recruitment
of
Committee
Members

Teachers
and
parents
were
invited
to
apply
to
serve
on
the
English
Language
Learner
Program
Review
committee
in
May
of
2008.
Parents
were
notified
of
this
opportunity
through
newsletters,
emails,
and/or
notices
published
at
the
individual
schools.
PTO
presidents
were
instrumental
in
helping
to
publicize
the
opportunity.
Interested
individuals
provided
basic
information
on
an
application
form
submitted
to
the
Director
of
Program
Review.
Teachers
were
notified
via
the
FirstClass
e-
mail
system.
Requirements
for
participation
include
the
availability
to
attend
monthly
after-
school
meetings,
and
a
willingness
to
study
current
research,
analyze
data
from
the
Public
Schools
of
Brookline,
maintain
confidentiality,
be
full
of
questions
not
answers,
honor
group
process
and
value
collaboration.

A
number
of
parents
and
educators
applied
to
serve
on
the
committee.
The
committee
was
formed
so
as
to
include
a
wide
representation
across
schools
and
grades.
The
final
decision
for
committee
membership
rested
with
the
Deputy
Superintendent
for
Teaching
and
Learning.

Other
opportunities
for
involvement

While
only
three
parents
and
four-
six
teachers
can
serve
on
the
actual
Program
Review
Committee,
there
are
other
opportunities
for
both
parents
and
teachers
to
provide
direct
input
into
the
review
process.
They
may
participate
in
a
focus
group,
complete
an
online
survey,
or
write
directly
to
the
committee.

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
English
Language
Learner
Program
Review
Committee
2008-
2009

Name
Role

Mindy
Paulo,
co-
chair
K-12
ELL
Coordinator
Amy
Martin,
co-
chair
Director
of
Program
Review
and
Grants
Vibe
Anderson
Parent,
Driscoll
Megan
Drumm
Speech
and
Language,
Devotion
Brad
Kozel
Science
teacher,
BHS
Deborah
Levine
ELL
teacher,
Pierce
and
Heath
Lilia
Levitina
ELL
teacher,
Driscoll
Arnie
Marcus
CVTE
Curriculum
Coordinator
Maria
Marrero
ELL
teacher,
Runkle
Young
Park
Parent,
Pierce
Linda
Rodriguez-
Hutson
Vice-
principal,
Baker
School
Fran
Rota
Parent,
Driscoll
Pipier
Smith-
Mumford
Principal,
Pierce
School
Min-
Jen
Wu
Taylor
preK
teacher,
Heath

C.
Phase
I
Process
Committee
Meetings

During
the
2008-
2009
school
year,
the
committee
met
regularly
after-
school,
and
held
one
all-
day
meeting.
Meeting
dates
were:
9/17/08,
10/15/
08,
11/13/08,
12/10/08,
1/7/09,
2/4/09,
3/5/09
(all
day)
,
4/1/09,
and
5/6/09.
During
meetings
and
in-
between
meetings
committee
members
examined,
reviewed,
and
discussed
information
about
the
current
program
from
a
variety
of
sources
and
perspectives.
Committee
members
also
read
background
information/research
about
English
Language
learning,
programs,
and
students.
An
annotated
listing
of
these
data/information
sources
and
background
readings
are
described
in
the
Information/Data
Sources
section
of
this
report
(Part
III)
.
Based
on
the
entire
body
of
information
reviewed,
the
committee
developed
a
vision
statement
for
the
program,
identified
program
strengths
and
areas
for
improvement,
and
suggested
next
steps/areas
of
inquiry
to
address
areas
for
improvement.
Meeting
agendas
and
summaries
are
on
file
in
the
Office
of
Teaching
and
Learning.

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Outside
Data
Gatherer

As
part
of
Phase
One
of
Program
Review,
the
committee
seeks
to
gather
information
about
the
current
state
of
the
program.
In
order
to
gather
objective
information
from
parents,
teachers,
and
administrators
about
their
perceptions,
expectations
and
understandings
of
the
program,
an
outside
consultant
was
hired
to
gather
and
analyze
this
data,
and
summarize
the
findings.

Dr.
Julie
Coppola

The
Director
of
Program
Review
and
Grants
identified
several
potential
outside
data
gatherers
to
work
with
the
Program
Review
committee.
After
reviewing
proposals
and
checking
references,
Dr.
Julie
Coppola
from
Boston
University
was
selected.
A
timeline
for
the
project
was
proposed
and
agreed
upon.

Dr.
Coppola
worked
with
the
committee
at
the
October
13th
meeting
and
through
the
following
month
to
develop
the
questions
and
topics
to
be
used
in
the
data
collection
tools
(on-
line
surveys
and
focus
groups)
.

The
data
collection
process
included
two
on-
line
surveys
(parents
of
ELL
students
and
K-12
teachers)
and
a
series
of
focus
groups:
parents
of
ELL
students,
principals,
classroom
teachers
and
literacy
Specialists,
ELL
teachers,
Special
Education
teachers,
and
Curriculum
Coordinators.
The
focus
groups
were
held
during
December
2008
through
early
February
2009.
The
surveys
were
available
to
the
community
throughout
most
of
the
month
of
December.

Dr.
Coppola
presented
an
overview
of
the
data
findings
in
a
draft
report
to
the
committee
on
March
5,
2009.
Suggestions
for
additional
analysis
were
made,
and
a
final
draft
provided
to
the
committee
by
the
end
of
March.
The
executive
summary
is
included
in
this
report
as
appendix
a;
the
full
report
is
available
from
the
Office
of
Teaching
and
Learning.

Recruiting
Process
for
Parent
Focus
Groups

An
informational
flyer
about
Program
Review
and
opportunities
for
parents
to
participate
was
sent
home
to
all
families
in
the
back
to
school
packet
in
September
of
2009.
The
flyer
included
a
tear-
off
portion
for
parents
to
return
to
the
Director
of
Program
Review
and
Grants
if
they
were
interested
in
participating
in
a
parent
focus
group
later
in
the
year.
PTO
presidents
also
distributed
this
invitational
flyer
at
their
fall
meetings.
The
response
form
asked
for
school
name,
children s
grade
level(s)
,
and
e-
mail
address.
Over
200
parents
responded,
indicating
a
willingness
to
be
contacted
about
participation
in
a
focus
group.
An
e-
mail
database
was
set
up
and
used
to
recruit
parents
for
focus
groups
in
January.

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Parent
Survey
Participation

The
survey
for
parents
of
ELL
students
was
available
on-
line
and
in
hard
copy.
The
survey
was
available
in
translation
in
the
6
major
language
groups
in
the
hard
copy.
(Russian,
Korean,
Chinese,
Spanish,
Japanese
and
Hebrew)
.
Parents
of
ELL
students
were
notified
of
the
opportunity
to
provide
information
to
the
committee
via
survey
in
a
variety
of
ways.
The
ELL
Program
coordinator
enlisted
the
assistance
of
the
ELL
program
teachers
to
send
a
hard
copy
of
the
survey
home
to
all
parents
(in
English
and
the
proper
translation)
.
The
ELL
program
email
listservs
and
the
Program
Review
listserv
of
interested
parents
were
used
to
advertise
and
promote
the
on-
line
version
of
the
survey.
Parents
were
offered
support
in
completing
the
survey,
if
requested.
A
total
of
192
parents
completed
the
survey
in
either
the
on-
line
or
hard
copy
format.

Teacher
Survey
Participation

All
Brookline
teachers
were
invited
and
encouraged
to
participate
in
the
on-
line
survey
through
notices
on
e-
mail
conferences
that
contained
a
direct
link
to
the
survey.
Teachers
were
also
notified
by
a
direct
e-
mail
containing
a
link
to
the
survey
site,
delivered
to
their
personal
e-
mailboxes.
The
survey
asked
for
teachers
to
identify
their
role
in
the
system,
and
was
designed
to
branch
into
separate
questions
for
ELL
teachers.
A
total
of
232
teachers
responded
to
the
survey.
D.
Phase
I
Process
Updates
and
Evaluation
Updates

Informal
updates
were
provided
regularly
to
both
the
Deputy
Superintendent
for
Teaching
and
Learning
and
the
Superintendent
over
the
course
of
the
2008-
2009
school
year.
Phase
I
findings
were
presented
to
principals,
Senior
Cabinet,
and
the
School
Committee
Curriculum
Sub-
committee
in
May
of
2009.
A
Phase
I
report/presentation
to
the
School
Committee
was
made
on
June
4,
2009.
Feedback/Evaluation

All
committee
members
will
be
asked
to
complete
a
Program
Review
feedback
form
at
end
of
Phase
I.
The
co-
chairs
will
use
the
information
to
improve
the
process
for
Phase
II.
E.
Next
Steps
Phase
II
Phase
II
work
will
begin
in
September
of
2009.
Suggested
next
steps
are
included
in
Part
II
of
the
report.

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Part
II
Committee
Findings

A.
Overview
of
the
ELL
Program
Brookline s
English
Language
Learners
(ELL)
Program
serves
more
than
450
limited
English
proficient
students
each
year.
Representing
over
30
first
language
groups,
some
of
these
students
are
immigrants
while
others
are
short
term
residents
whose
parents
are
pursuing
professional
studies
in
New
England
for
one
or
two
years.
The
ELL
Program
has
made
concerted
efforts
to
respond
to
unpredictable
shifts
in
enrollments
and
transient
populations.
Each
school
has
at
least
one
ELL
program
which
follows
an
Integrative
Sheltered
English
Immersion
model.
In
addition,
Brookline
offers
native
language
support
programs
in
Hebrew,
Japanese,
Chinese,
Korean,
Russian,
and
Spanish
for
students
in
grades
K-
8
as
well.
All
programs
are
designed
to
meet
the
educational
needs
of
English
Language
Learners
by
providing
English
language
instruction
and
specially
designed
academic
support.
The
goals
are
for
students
to
learn
English
and
meet
appropriate
grade-
level
academic
achievement
standards.

The
Integrated
Sheltered
English
Immersion
(SEI)
Program
provides
instruction
primarily
in
English,
including
a
sequential
English
Language
Arts
program
and
sheltered
instruction
support
in
content
areas.
Students
work
with
ELL
staff
for
part
of
their
school
day
and
are
integrated
into
regular
classrooms
where
they
participate
in
instruction
and
activities
with
English
speaking
peers.
The
amount
of
integration
and
support
varies
according
to
each
student s
needs,
grade,
and
level
of
English
proficiency.
In
addition,
general
education
classroom
teachers
and
content-
specific
teachers
are
in
the
process
of
being
trained
to
work
with
ELL
students
and
in
providing
sheltered
instruction.
ELL
staff
often
work
with
classroom
teachers
and
other
specialists
to
assist
with
instruction

Our
Native
Language
Support
Programs
also
follow
an
Integrative
SEI
model.
Most
students
enrolled
in
these
programs
are
serviced
a
minimum
of
twice
daily:
once
by
an
ELL
teacher
who
is
able
to
speak
the
first
language
for
clarification
purposes
and
once
by
an
ELL
teacher
who
does
not
speak
the
primary
language.
Schedules
and
caseloads
may
influence
the
frequency
of
students
services.
In
both
cases,
students
are
integrated
into
regular
education
classrooms
for
the
majority
of
the
school
day
and
receive
ELL
support
within
those
classes
or
in
a
resource
room
with
a
pullout
arrangement.
The
amount
of
integration
and
ELL
support
varies
according
to
each
child s
needs.
Careful
assessment,
on-
going
monitoring,
flexible
programming
and
scheduling,
and
close
collaboration
between
ELL
staff
and
classroom
teachers
help
ensure
appropriate
instruction
for
each
child.

At
the
high
school,
students
who
were
in
a
native
language
support
program
enjoy
full
participation
in
school
life:
credit-
bearing
ESL
classes
and
tutorials
comprise
a
fraction
of
a
student s
schedule.
Depending
on
their
grade,
previous
educational
experiences,
and

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
level
of
English
proficiency,
students
are
integrated
with
English
speaking
peers
in
a
range
of
academic
courses
and
in
programs
in
the
arts,
technology,
physical
education,
and
many
electives.
Sheltered
courses
are
offered
in
social
studies
and
science.

The
average
length
of
time
students
spend
in
our
program
is
1.7
years.
Many
of
the
students
who
are
mainstreamed
from
the
program
perform
as
well
as
their
English
peaking
peers
on
standardized
and
statewide
assessments.
The
program
is
well
supported
by
parents,
staff,
and
the
community.
Lastly,
Brookline s
integrative
program
model
is
supported
by
the
system s
current
core
values:
high
academic
achievement
for
all
students,
excellence
in
teaching,
collaborative
relationships,
and
respect
for
human
differences.

In
summary,
the
ELL
Program
is
responsive
to
both
short-
and
long-
term
enrollees,
has
the
confidence
and
support
of
parents/guardians
and
the
community,
involves
parents/guardians
in
their
child s
education,
and
ensures
equitable
access
to
academic
and
nonacademic
programs
for
limited
English
proficient
students.
The
staff
is
reflective
about
their
practice
and
embraces
improvements
that
enhance
student
learning
and
increase
academic
achievement
for
all
students.

B.
ELL
Program
Vision*
The
ELL
Program
Review
Committee
crafted
a
vision
that
reflects
the
Core
Value
of
the
Public
Schools
of
Brookline
and
current
research
in
the
field.
The
vision
articulates
our
values
and
beliefs
about
educating
English
language
learners
in
Brookline.
It
includes
four
essential
principles
of
an
effective
program:
Instructional
Services,
Professional
Development,
Cultural
Values,
and
Community
Connections.
As
part
of
this
process,
the
Committee:

-
reviewed
vision
statements
from
other
districts
and
organizations

-
identified
areas
that
were
central
to
the
philosophy
of
Brookline s
ELL
program

-
read
through
literature
that
highlighted
best
practices
and
successful
programming

-
gathered
feedback
from
ELL
staff
regarding
beliefs
about
effective
ELL
practices
and
long-
term
goals
for
the
program
so

that
these
could
be
incorporated

-
composed
multiple
drafts
and
collected
feedback
from
program
review
committee
members

*
Brookline s
ELL
Program
Vision
is
a
working
document
that
will
be
refined
as
the
Program
Review
process
progresses.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
English
Language
Learners
(ELL)
Program
Vision
Statement

It
is
our
vision
that
English
language
learners
understand,
speak,
read,
and
write
English
fluently
and
competently
in
order
to
succeed
academically
and
socially
in
their
classrooms,
schools,
and
communities
at
large.
Students
acquire
the
linguistic
and
cultural
knowledge
to
function
effectively
globally.

Instructional
Services

ELL
instruction
develops
English
language
proficiency
and
supports
academic
content
knowledge.
Individual
needs
are
respected
and
accommodated
through
the
use
of
various
instructional
methods
fostering
high
academic
achievement.
ELL
students
are
proportionately
represented
in
all
school
programs
and
services.
They
become
confident
learners
and
are
empowered
through
the
development
of
critical
thought,
reflection,
and
action.

Professional
Development
Classroom
teachers
and
ELL
specialists
are
prepared
to
work
collaboratively
to
effectively
educate
English
language
learners.
Classroom
teachers
are
trained
to
provide
quality
sheltered
English
immersion
(SEI)
instruction.
ELL
specialists
participate
in
professional
learning
that
provides
them
with
resources
to
enhance
their
instructional
delivery
of
English.
All
teachers
and
specialists
are
able
to
make
meaningful
content
connections
and
accurately
assess
students
performance
and
educational
profiles.
They
are
qualified
to
and
feel
confident
working
with
English
language
learners
in
their
classrooms.

Cultural
Values

ELL
students
are
valued
members
of
a
community
that
embraces
the
exchange
of
cultural
knowledge,
encourages
and
supports
the
acquisition
of
language
and
appreciation
of
culture,
and
ensures
that
the
cultural
backgrounds
of
students
are
reflected
within
the
curricula.
ELL
students
develop
a
deeper
understanding
of
both
their
own
cultures
and
those
of
the
diverse
community.
Students
become
increasingly
active
participants
and
share
their
perspectives
in
all
educational
and
extracurricular
settings.

Community
Connections

The
Public
Schools
of
Brookline
provides
welcoming
opportunities
for
active
ELL
family
involvement,
assures
that
ELL
students
and
their
families
have
equal
access
to
school
and
community
resources,
and
embodies
the
cultural
identities
of
students
and
families
in
school
environments.

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
C.
Areas
of
Program
Strength
and
Areas
for
Improvement
How
the
finding
are
organized:

The
committee
used
the
program
vision
as
guidance,
and
reviewed
information
and
data
about
the
program.
Determinations
were
made
as
to
where
the
program
was
strong
relative
to
the
vision,
and
where
the
program
could
grow
or
improve.

Findings
were
grouped
into
two
categories:
Instructional
Services
and
Culture
and
Community.
These
categories
are
based
on
the
vision.
Professional
development
is
folded
into
Instructional
Services,
and
Cultural
Values
and
Community
Connections
have
been
combined.

For
each
category,
you
will
see:

1
Program
Strengths

A
bulleted
list
of
the
big
ideas
under
this
section
A
chart
with
details
of
finding,
referencing
information
and/or
data
sources
2
Areas
for
Program
Improvement

A
bulleted
list
of
the
big
ideas
under
this
section
A
chart
with
details
of
finding,
referencing
information
and/or
data
sources
3
Next
Steps
for
the
committee
to
start
off
Phase
II

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
INSTRUCTIONAL
SERVICES

Instructional
Services:
Program
Strengths

Brookline
ELL
students
perform
well
on
the
Massachusetts
English
Language
Proficiency
Assessment
(MEPA)
and
perform
well
on
Math
MCAS
exams.
The
ELL
staff
is
experienced
and
highly
qualified.
Program
processes
around
identification,
entrance/exit
screenings,
and
placement
assessment
are
efficient
and
effective.
The
program
model
is
flexible
and
allows
all
identified
students
to
receive
services,
including:
o
Grouping
by
language
proficiency
at
Brookline
High
School
o
Small
group,
individualized
instruction
using
pull-
out
services
in
grades
K-
8
o
Integration
with
native
speakers
o
English
language
development
is
taught
through
content
o
Sheltered
English
Immersion
(SEI)
classes
at
BHS.
Instruction
is
supported
by
a
range
of
available
curriculum
materials.
FLEP
students
are
monitored
for
two
years
after
exiting
the
program.
STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
Brookline
ELL
students
meet
or
exceed
state
and
local
progress
and
attainment
targets
on
MEPA
exams.
(See
appendix
b,
AMAO
report)
Student
achievement
data
3-10
Overall,
ELL
students
perform
fairly
on
the
MCAS
exam.
Math
MCAS
scores
demonstrate
proficient
performance
levels.
For
example,
on
the
2008
Math
MCAS,
83%
of
ELL
students
reached
proficiency
compared
to
only
73%
of
all
students.
(See
appendix
e,
ELL
MCAS
performance.
)
Student
achievement
data
STUDENT
PARTICIPATION
IN
NON-
ELL
COURSES
Information/Data
Sources
K-
8
The
number
of
ELL
students
in
grades
7
and
8
who
take
World
Language
classes
is
steadily
increasing
(in
the
past,
ELL
students
were
not
encouraged
to
take
World
Language
classes
in
Grades
7/8,
and
very
few
did)
.
During
the
2008-
2009
school
year,
15%
of
all
grade
7
and
8
ELL
students
are
enrolled
in
a
world
language
course
compared
to
9%
during
the
2007-
2008
school
year.
Program
information

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
9-12
Each
year,
more
than
80%
of
all
ELL
at
Brookline
High
School
participate
in
an
elective
course.
Electives
afford
ELLs
the
opportunity
to
engage
in
authentic,
meaningful
learning
with
their
English-
speaking
peers,
the
exposure
to
a
variety
of
courses
that
supplement
their
core
academic
course
load,
and
the
ability
to
participate
in
courses
that
compliment
their
English
language
development
classes.
It
also
gives
students
the
opportunity
to
express
themselves
and
shine
in
ways
that
require
less
language.
This
is
important
for
their
self-
esteem
as
well
as
their
social
development
among
peers.
Program
information
PROGRAM
MODEL
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
Teachers,
parents,
and
administrators
report
that
the
program
benefits
from
the
strong
leadership
of
the
ELL
Program
Coordinator.
JC
report
9-12
ESL
Courses
are
offered
by
proficiency
levels
at
BHS
as
supported
by
research
and
recommended
by
the
MA
DESE.
Ninety-
eight
percent
(98%
)
of
students
who
complete
all
three
levels
of
ESL,
graduate
with
advanced
levels
of
English
proficiency.
According
to
research
and
in
compliance
with
the
MA
DESE
recommendations,
offering
ESL
courses
by
proficiency
levels
the
way
the
program
is
designed
at
BHS,
yieds
such
high
results.
DESE
review
in
compliance
K-
8
The
average
teacher/student
ratio
in
instructional
groups
at
the
elementary
level
is
low
--
1:8.
This
allows
ELL
teachers
to
design
instructional
opportunities
that
aim
at
meeting
the
individual
needs
of
students,
routinely
assess
students
progress
towards
acquiring
advanced
levels
of
English
proficiency,
and
monitor
students
ability
to
access
general
education
curriculum.
Program
information
K-
8
The
instructional
model
used
in
K-8,
predominantly
pull-
out
with
push-in
support
as
schedules
permit,
allows
for
focused
English
language
development
(ELD)
instruction
and
assistance
with
content
material.
Program
information
K-12
Approximately
96%
of
students
in
grades
K-
4
and
grades
9-12
who
enter
the
ELL
Program
with
intermediate
levels
of
English
proficiency,
acquire
advanced
proficiency
and
exit
the
program
within
1.7
years.
An
estimated
92%
of
students
in
grades
5-
8
who
enter
the
ELL
Program
with
intermediate
levels
of
English
proficiency,
acquire
advanced
proficiency
and
exit
the
program
within
2.4
years.
Students
in
grades
5-
12,
approximately
31%
,
who
enter
the
program
with
beginning
levels
of
English
proficiency,
generally
exit
the
program
within
3
years.
These
figures
reflect
the
amount
of
time
ELLs
receive
direct
ELD
instruction.
Student
enrollment
data

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
9-12
The
program
staff
includes
an
International
Student
Advisor
(ISA)
at
BHS
a
position
dedicated
to
helping
ELL
students
at
the
high
school
assimilate
(socially,
emotionally,
and
academically)
to
the
community.
For
example,
the
ISA
helps
students
access
supports
and
adapt
to
school
routines
and
expectations;
facilitates
conversations
between
students,
teachers,
and
families;
collaborates
with
elementary
ELL
teachers
and
guidance
staff
regarding
transitioning
8th
graders;
serve
as
a
liaison
between
the
ELL
program
and
the
administration
on-
site
at
BHS;
guides
families
and
students
through
the
I-
20
process
and
stay
current
with
F-
1
and
J-
1
regulations
and
procedures;
and
supervises
and
coordinates
MEPA
testing
at
BHS.
Program
information
K-
8
K-
8
ELL
students
are
integrated
with
native
English
speakers
for
most
of
the
school
day.
As
a
result,
ELLs
are
able
to
participate
in
grade-
level
math,
science,
and
social
studies
instruction
that
helps
prepare
them
to
meet
Brookline s
Learning
Expectations,
state
curriculum
frameworks,
and
district
and
state
assessments.
Program
information
PROGRAM
PROCESSES
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
The
program
uses
effective
entry
assessment
processes
to
place
students
at
the
appropriate
level
of
ELL
instruction.
Program
information,
JC
report
K-12
Teachers
and
parents
report
that
student
progress
in
attaining
proficiency
in
English
is
appropriately
monitored.
Brookline s
ELL
assessment
system
includes
instruments
that
ELL
teachers
may
use
throughout
the
year
to
measure
a
student s
English
level.
Beginning
in
May
2009,
ELL
students
current
proficiency
levels
as
well
as
recommended
placements
for
the
subsequent
school
year,
will
be
reported
annually
to
parents
at
the
end
of
the
year.
For
former
limited
English
proficient
(FLEP)
students,
their
progress
in
general
education
settings
without
ELL
support,
is
monitored
for
2
years.
This
information
is
shared
with
classroom
teachers
and
other
specialists
working
with
students.
JC
report,
program
information
K-12
Entry
and
exit
criteria
are
clear.
Upon
entrance
into
the
program,
parents
receive
a
Parent
Notification
Letter
that
includes
a
description
of
the
various
program
options
as
well
as
criteria
that
must
be
met
in
order
to
exit
services.
When
students
are
being
recommended
to
graduate
from
the
program,
parents
are
asked
to
sign
a
Reclassification
Form
that
identifies
the
exit
criteria.
Copies
of
these
forms
are
placed
in
each
student s
permanent
record
for
teachers
and
other
school
personnel
to
review.
Program
information,
forms,
parent
letters

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
K-12
Identification
procedures
for
prospective
ELL
students
are
systematic.
A
Home
Language
Survey
is
distributed
to
families
at
the
point
of
registration.
Survey
responses
determine
whether
or
not
incoming
students
need
to
be
assessed
for
ELL
services.
In
addition,
a
comprehensive
process
for
identifying
and
assessing
incoming
Kindergarten
students
is
in
place.
With
the
creation
of
a
stream-
lined
registration,
identification,
and
assessment
process,
more
than
97%
of
students
are
accurately
placed
in
instructional
groups.
Program
information
CURRICULUM
RESOURCES
AND
SUPPORT
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
ELD
curriculum
guides
are
available
for
grades
3-
6
and
9-12
as
a
resource
to
all
ELL
teachers.
Final
revisions
will
be
made
to
guides
for
grades
K-
2
and
7-
8
during
the
summer
of
2009.
Program
information
4,
6,
8,
9-12
Sheltered
English
Immersion
(SEI)
curriculum
units
have
been
developed
to
support
classroom
instruction
for
ELLs
Sheltered
Social
Studies
units
in
grades
4,
6,
and
8
Sheltered
Biology
and
Physics
in
grades
9-12
Sheltered
U.S.
History
in
grades
9-12
Funding
is
available
through
the
Title
III
grant
to
support
this
work.
Program
information
9-12
Interdepartmental
collaboration
exists
at
BHS
which
increases
resources
and
an
awareness
of
ELL
student
needs,
and
makes
ELLs
more
visible
in
the
community.
Examples:
CVTE:
cost-
share,
training,
and
use
of
advanced
instructional
technology
equipment
including
SmartBoards
World
Language:
selection,
promotion,
organization,
and
reflection
of
school-
wide
summer
reading;
use
of
language
lab
Social
Studies
and
World
Language:
preliminary
stages
of
Global
Competency
Initiative
Program
Information
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
and
COLLABORATION
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
ELL
TEACHERS:
have
opportunities
for
professional
development
outside
of
the
Brookline
system
MATSOL,
TESOL,
EDCO
share
curriculum
with
other
ELL
teachers
at
staff
meetings
(ex:
sheltered
units
they
have
created
with
classroom
teachers)
have
access
to
the
ELL
Resource
Library
for
materials
in
content
areas
and
materials
to
support
English
language
development
Program
information

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
K-8ContentareacoordinatorssharelessonplansandresourceswithELLteachersatELLstaffm
eetings.
Programinformation
Instructional
Services:
Areas
for
Program
Improvement

Brookline
is
just
beginning
to
provide
adequate
SEI
training
for
classroom
teachers;
only
a
small
percentage
have
completed
one
or
more
categories
of
training.
Course
options
for
ELL
students
at
BHS
are
limited
due
to
student
and
school
schedules,
and
the
limited
number
of
SEI
classes.
Students
do
not
receive
services
for
the
recommended
number
of
hours
per
week
or
are
not
always
placed
in
proficiency-
based
instructional
groups
due
to
a
fixed
number
of
teacher
hours,
scheduling
limitations,
and
increasing
numbers
of
students,
which
result
in
higher
caseloads
for
all
ELL
teachers.
Teaching
spaces
are
not
always
conducive
to
effective
instruction.
(Class
sizes,
activities
and
grouping
options
are
limited.
)
ELL
teachers
and
classroom
teachers
do
not
have
sufficient
time
to
meet
and
co-
plan
instruction.
STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT
Information/Data
Sources
6-
8
There
is
a
lack
of
consistent
criteria
for
grading
ELL
students
in
grades
6-
8
across
schools.
Program
information
K-12
In
grades
K-5,
there
are
no
systematic
procedures
for
writing
and
distributing
progress
reports
for
ELL
students.
The
DESE
requires
that
these
reports
be
on
the
same
schedule
as
general
education
students.
In
grades
K-
12,
there
are
inconsistencies
across
the
system,
related
to
unresolved
system
and
program
guidelines
about
grading.
Program
information
K-
8
Classes
are
often
interrupted
or
cancelled
due
to
reasons
that
do
not
benefit
students
or
directly
contribute
to
their
academic
achievement.
Examples
include:
bilingual
teachers
are
often
called
upon
during
school
hours
to
serve
as
translators
when
a
new
family
arrives
teachers
are
asked
to
be
present
during
Kindergarten
registration
each
February
to
assist
families
teachers
may
need
to
assess
incoming
students
during
the
school
day
because
funding
is
not
available
to
support
this
procedure
before
or
after
school
school
assemblies,
plays,
and
sporting
events
are
scheduled
during
the
school
day,
resulting
in
missed
classes
teachers
may
need
to
attend
a
meeting
(i.e.
Child
Study
Team)
about
one
student
Program
information,
JC
report

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
K-12
There
is
a
need
for
further
identification,
articulation,
and
communication
of
academic
goals,
both
content
and
linguistic,
for
each
grade
between
levels
of
English
proficiency.
JC
report
STUDENT
PARTICIPATION
IN
NON-
ELL
COURSES
Information/Data
Sources
9-12
BHS
does
not
offer
appropriately
leveled
courses
in
math
and
science
for
ELL
students
who
enter
BHS
with
interrupted
schooling
and
do
not
have
the
prerequisite
knowledge
or
course
work
required.
These
students
are
currently
struggling
in
the
lowest-
level
courses
available
that
are
beyond
their
ability
levels
and/or
have
been
placed
in
a
tutorial
once
a
week.
Program
information,
JC
report
9-12
There
is
a
lack
of
sheltered
content
courses
available
for
ELL
students
at
BHS.
Currently,
one
Social
Studies
course
(U.S.
History)
,
and
one
Science
course
per
year
-
either
biology,
chemistry,
or
physics
-
are
available.
Additional
sheltered
courses
are
needed
in
math
for
a
particular
portion
of
our
population,
specifically
lower-
level
math
students
with
interrupted
schooling.
Program
information,
JC
report
PROGRAM
MODEL
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
Overall,
parents
report
being
very
satisfied
with
the
program,
the
processes
for
enrolling
in
the
program
(intake)
and
moving
through
the
program
JC
report
preK-
K
Although
Brookline
is
considered
a
Prek
-
12
system,
early
intervention
for
ELL
preK
students
is
not
available.
The
DESE
requires
districts
to
serve
ELL
students
beginning
with
the
Kindergarten
year.
(This
is
true
for
all
districts.
)
There
is
currently
no
system
of
identifying
how
many
students
in
the
preschool
population
could
benefit
from
ELL
support,
nor
is
there
any
mandate
to
serve
these
students.
Program
information
K-12
Although
the
ELL
program
is
required
to
monitor
the
progress
of
formerly
limited
English
proficient
(FLEP)
(follow)
students
for
2
years
after
exiting
the
program,
there
is
limited
additional
academic
support
for
these
students.
Classroom
and
content
teachers
are
asked
to
complete
a
Student
Progress
Review
Form
once
a
year
to
note
students
progress
in
demonstrating
specific
skills.
Once
these
forms
are
completed,
ELL
teachers
review
the
information
and
determine
if
additional
educational
resources
may
be
needed.
Students
in
grades
5-12
often
have
the
most
difficulty
transitioning
from
ELL
classes
to
a
general
education
program
because
of
the
vast
amount
of
content
being
taught.
Classroom
and
content
teachers
would
like
additional
resources
to
better
support
students
in
these
situations.
Program
information,
JC
report

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
K-
8
The
distribution
of
FTEs
with
respect
to
ELL
student
enrollment
in
each
school
is
not
equal,
resulting
in
uneven
caseloads
for
ELL
teachers.
For
example,
some
teachers
are
responsible
for
nine
grade
levels
while
others
are
only
responsible
for
four
grades.
Some
full-
time
teachers
support
more
than
forty
students
a
day
while
others
only
support
twenty.
As
a
result,
students
who
are
placed
in
programs
with
larger
teacher/student
ratios,
are
not
able
to
receive
an
adequate
amount
of
ELD
instruction
and
content
support
as
recommended
by
the
DESE.
In
addition,
students
are
often
placed
in
groups
with
the
mixed
levels
of
ability
rather
than
by
proficiency.
(See
appendix
c.
)
Program
information
K-
8
Overall
students
are
not
able
to
receive
an
appropriate
amount
of
English
instruction
due
to
increased
enrollments
and
decreased
staffing.
The
only
budget
increases
in
the
ELL
Program
budget
over
the
last
five
years
has
been
due
to
step
and
lane
advancement.
(See
appendix
d.
)
Beginner
to
intermediate
students
fall
short
of
having
the
recommended
number
of
instructional
minutes.
This
is
due
to
the
staffing
and
enrollment
inequities
across
schools,
as
well
as
the
housing
of
native
language
support
programs
in
specific
buildings.
Schools
with
fewer
FTEs
and
increasing
enrollments
are
not
able
to
provide
the
2.5
hours
of
direct
ELD
instruction
recommended
by
the
DESE.
We
are
not
able
to
provide
the
recommended
1.5-
2
hours
for
intermediate
students
for
the
same
reason.
Especially
for
teachers
who
are
responsible
for
grades
K-8,
meeting
the
recommended
instructional
guidelines
is
impossible.
These
teachers
often
work
with
multiple
teachers
at
each
grade
level
resulting
in
scheduling
conflicts
and
proficiency
grouping
needs.
Further,
ELL
staff
are
not
able
to
push-in
to
classes
as
often
as
they
would
like
or
collaborate
with
classroom
teachers
because
of
scheduling
demands.
Program
information,
JC
report,
DESE
report
K-12
Information
about
ELL
program
procedures
and
guidelines
is
not
available
in
an
easily
accessible
format
(such
as
a
handbook)
for
ELL
teachers
new
to
the
system
(and
classroom
teachers)
.
Thus,
entry/exit
placement
procedures
may
not
be
followed
properly,
required
paperwork
is
not
completed,
student
enrollments
are
not
accurately
reported,
ELL
support
expectations
are
unclear,
learning
goals
are
unknown,
and
students
may
not
receive
an
optimal
level
of
service.
Program
information
Program
information,
JC
report

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
PROGRAM
PROCESSES
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
There
are
no
clear
criteria
of
English
language
proficiency
levels
by
grade;
there
is
a
lack
of
understanding
by
parents
and
teachers
about
proficiency
levels,
as
well
as
program
entrance
and
exit
criteria.
Program
information,
JC
report
K-12
Program
descriptions
do
not
match
the
delivery
of
instruction.
This
leads
to
misunderstandings
about
the
program
model
and
services.
JC
report
K-12
The
intake
process
requires
multiple
steps
that
sometimes
create
delays
for
start
of
school.
A
bilingual
staff
member
assesses
students
who
may
be
eligible
for
one
of
the
district s
Native
Language
Support
Programs.
Given
that
these
teachers
may
not
be
in
the
prospective
family s
neighborhood
school,
scheduling
a
language
screening
takes
additional
time.
Language
screenings
take
30-60
minutes
to
administer
depending
on
the
student s
grade
and
level
of
ability.
Program
information
K-12
ELL
teachers
do
not
assess
content
knowledge
of
students
when
they
arrive
only
their
English
proficiency.
Thus,
it
is
difficult
to
determine
what
students
know
and
are
able
to
do
across
disciplines,
and
the
amount
of
support
students
may
need
during
content
instruction.
At
the
secondary
level,
ELL
students
may
be
placed
in
appropriately
or
are
unprepared
to
access
the
curriculum.
Program
information
K-
8
ELL
teachers
have
large
caseloads
which
keep
increasing.
There
is
little
time
for
ELL
teachers
to
consult
with
and
co-
plan
with
general
education
teachers
as
researchers
identify
as
a
best
practice.
This
also
makes
it
a
challenge
to
effectively
provide
push-in
support.
(See
appendix
c.
)
Program
information,
JC
report
CURRICULUM
RESOURCES
AND
SUPPORT
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
The
program
budget
does
not
cover
the
cost
of
providing
consumable
materials
for
students.
Teachers
often
pay
out
of
pocket
or
explore
other
funding
sources
to
extend
the
resources
so
that
students
have
access
to
consumable
materials
that
supplement
both
ELD
and
content
instruction.
*
The
ELL
Program
budget
for
materials/textbooks/print
has
been
level-
funded
for
over
five
years
even
though
enrollments
and
cost
of
materials
has
changed
during
this
time.
(See
appendix
d.
)
Program
information

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
K-12
There
is
no
formalized
curriculum
or
program
used
across
schools
in
ELL
settings.
Designing
a
curriculum
for
multiple
grade
levels
and
supporting
four
content
areas
requires
a
significant
amount
of
planning
time.
This
is
particularly
difficult
for
teachers
who
are
responsible
for
students
in
grades
K-8.
Furthermore,
it
is
difficult
to
establish
performance
benchmarks
when
a
systematic
set
of
materials
is
not
being
utilized.
Program
information
K-12
General
education
teachers
do
not
have
the
materials
they
need
to
support
ELL
students
in
their
classes
and/or
content
areas.
This
is
true
of
current
ELLs
in
math,
social
studies,
and
science,
and
FLEP
students
who
are
fully
integrated
into
mainstream
curriculum.
Teachers
need
supports
to
shelter
their
curriculum
and
identify
materials
that
are
appropriate
for
the
grade
and
level
of
ability.
Program
information,
JC
report
K-12
Teachers
have
difficulty
identifying
special
learning
needs
in
ELL
students;
special
education
teachers
are
not
trained
in
ELL
and
vice
versa;
the
process
for
getting
students
services
is
slow
and
cumbersome.
Program
information,
JC
report
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
and
COLLABORATION
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
Brookline
does
not
provide
in-
house
training
for
ELL
teachers
in
ELL
content
or
pedagogy,
and
ELL
teachers
rarely
participate
in
Brookline
content
area
PD
(ex:
Think
Math!
release
day)
Program
information
K-12
ELL
teachers
may
not
be
familiar
with
various
literacy
methods
used
in
different
grades
and
classes,
like
EmPower,
Lucy
Calkins,
etc.
ELL
teachers
should
be
versed
in
the
Brookline
instruction
and
assessment
used
in
ELA
in
their
schools.
Program
information
K-12
There
is
a
lack
of
SEI
trained
general
education
teachers
students
are
in
classes
with
teacher
for
the
majority
of
the
day
who
have
not
had
approved
training
to
provide
sheltered
English
immersion
instruction.
Students
are
in
SEI
classrooms
at
BHS
with
teachers
who
are
not
SEI
trained.
(This
year,
over
120
teachers
participated
in
category
trainings.
)
Program
Information
K-12
There
is
no
scheduled
common
planning
time
for
ELL
teachers
and
classroom
teachers
in
all
grade
levels.
There
is
little
time
to
observe
in
grade
level
classrooms
in
different
content
areas.
Program
information,
JC
report,
schedules
K-12
ELL
teachers
need
professional
development
in
understanding
special
needs
students
who
are
ELLs
and
Special
Education
teachers
need
to
learn
more
about
English
Language
Learners.
Program
information

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Next
Steps
Instructional
Services

Investigate
how
ELL
teachers
time
is
spent
during
a
typical
day
and
week
in
all
schools.
Review
current
SEI
plan
and
training
offerings,
and
connections
to
supervision
and
evaluation.
Investigate
how
caseloads
and
FTEs
affect
co-
planning
time
and
service
delivery
to
students,
and
the
variations
between
buildings.
Examine
what
course
options
are
needed
at
BHS
to
better
meet
ELL
student
needs.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
CULTURE
AND
COMMUNITY

Culture
and
Community:
Program
Strengths

The
ELL
program
has
a
positive
impact
on
school
culture
for
ELL
families;
they
feel
welcomed
and
supported,
and
that
their
culture
is
valued.
ELL
students
and
families
are
integrated
socially
and
academically
into
the
life
of
the
school
through
the
ELL
program
The
Native
Language
Support
Programs
(i.e.
Korean-
ELL)
create
a
network
of
support
for
students
and
their
families.
The
ELL
program
staff
spends
time
and
effort
linking
families
to
resources
that
help
them
adjust
to
life
in
Brookline
and
to
their
school
community.
The
ELL
program
collaborates
with
librarians
and
content
area
coordinators
to
ensure
books
and
resources
about
ELL
students
cultures
are
available.
IMPACT
of
ELL
PROGERAM
on
SCHOOL
CULTURE
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
ELL
program
teachers
work
with
school
staff
and
ELL
families
to
ensure
that
students
are
fully
integrated
into
school-
wide
extra-curricular
activities,
and
encouraged
and
welcomed
to
participate
in
plays,
sports
teams,
etc.
Program
information,
JC
report
K-12
Families
feel
that
their
students
are
welcomed
by
the
community.
ELL
students
and
families
report
that
they
feel
comfortable
speaking
and
interacting
in
their
native
language
in
the
schools.
There
is
a
culture
of
respect
for
ELL
students.
Students
work
and
presentations
are
received
respectfully.
There
is
no
stigma
attached
to
having
come
from
a
different
country.
JC
report
PROGRAM
MODEL
Information/Data
Sources
K-
8
Students
who
participate
in
the
Native
Language
Support
Program
(NLSP)
feel
supported
and
that
their
culture
is
valued/embraced
JC
report
K-12
Families
report
feeling
welcomed
and
supported
by
the
program
(particularly
new
families)
.
The
ELL
program
hosts
a
variety
of
events
at
the
school
level
to
ensure
that
families
feel
at
home.
They
co-
plan
and
participate
in
building
level
events
that
celebrate
cultures,
for
example:
an
orientation
night
for
new
families
multicultural
nights
at
various
schools
JC
report

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
9-12
BHS
has
a
club
for
International
students
that
is
supported
by
the
ELL
program.
The
club
sponsors
field
trips
to
integrate
them
into
the
community
(apple-
picking,
ice
skating)
Program
information
K-12
Some
ELL
teachers
provide
workshops
to
the
faculty
on
the
cultural
background
of
students.
Program
information
CURRICULUM
RESOURCES
AND
SUPPORT
K-12
ELL
teachers
work
collaboratively
with
school
librarians
to
build
collections
of
books
about
diverse
cultures,
and
foreign
language
collections.
Program
information
K-12
A
large
number
of
ELL
teachers
explore
cultural
studies
(through
travel
and
professional
development)
and
bring
back
information
and
resources
that
are
shared
with
the
ELL
staff.
Program
information
HOME
SCHOOL
CONNECTIONS
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
Translation
procedures
have
been
streamlined.
Classroom
teachers
and
ELL
teachers
are
more
aware
of
how
to
access
translation
and
interpreter
services
for
ELL
families.
Program
information
K-12
ELL
teachers
promote
adult
English
learning
opportunities
to
parents
of
ELL
students.
Program
information
K-12
The
ELL
staff
helps
new
families
become
familiar
with
the
Brookline
area,
the
schools
and
various
opportunities
for
students
and
families.
Examples:
The
ELL
staff
helps
to
develop
the
Welcome
to
Brookline
booklet,
which
is
distributed
to
new
families
and
contains
specific
information
for
international
families.
The
ELL
staff
provides
an
Adjusting
to
Life
in
Brookline
workshop
series
for
new
parents.
Program
information

Culture
and
Community:
Areas
for
Program
Improvement

Some
cultures
are
not
represented
in
the
school
environment
or
reflected
in
the
curriculum
materials.
Information
about
the
ELL
program
and
the
school
is
not
equally
available
to
all
families.
Information
about
ELL
students
prior
educational
experiences
is
not
readily
available
to
ELL
teachers.
IMPACT
of
ELL
PROGRAM
on
SCHOOL
CULTURE
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
Public
spaces
in
schools
generally
do
not
reflect
the
cultures
and
diverse
backgrounds
of
students.
Program
information
K-
8
Because
of
the
importance
and
presence
of
the
Native
Language
Support
Program
in
an
individual
school,
the
dominant
language
group
may
overshadow
other
cultural
groups
in
the
JC
report

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
school
within
the
same
ethnic
group.
For
example,
the
focus
on
Chinese
culture
and
language
at
Pierce
overshadows
the
Korean
culture.
Some
Korean
students
felt
left
out
during
the
celebrations
for
Chinese
New
Year
and
felt
it
should
have
been
Lunar
New
Year
celebration
that
included
all
Asians.
PROGRAM
MODEL
Information/Data
Sources
K-
8
ELL
Students
who
do
not
speak
one
of
the
six
supported
languages,
and
do
not
participate
in
Native
Language
Support
Program
do
not
feel
as
represented
in
their
schools.
JC
report
CURRICULUM
RESOURCES
AND
SUPPORT
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
Cultures
of
ELL
students
are
not
well-
represented
in
the
mainstream
curriculum
or
ELL
curriculum
guides.
As
a
system,
more
needs
to
be
done
to
educate
the
general
education
teachers
about
the
different
cultures
of
Brookline s
ELL
population,
and
culturally
relevant
materials
need
to
be
increased
in
classroom
and
ELL
settings.
.
Program
information
HOME
SCHOOL
CONNECTIONS
Information/Data
Sources
K-12
Translation
and
interpreter
services
are
not
always
provided
in
a
timely
manner.
This
is
particularly
true
of
last-
minute
requests
and
hard-
to-
find
languages.
As
a
result,
students
and
their
families
may
not
have
equal
access
to
information
being
distributed
because
it
is
in
a
language
they
do
not
understand,
or
meetings
are
canceled
because
an
interpreter
is
not
present.
Program
information
K-12
E-
mail
data-
bases
are
an
effective
means
of
communicating
with
ELL
families,
but
they
do
not
reach
all
families.
Not
all
families
have
internet
access
or
email
accounts,
and
the
data-
bases
are
not
set
up
in
all
schools.
Program
information
K-12
Parents
report
that
they
do
not
easily
have
access
to
comprehensive
information
about
the
program.
The
website
is
not
up-
to-
date,
and
other
means
of
providing
information
appear
to
be
inconsistent.
JC
report,
Program
information
K-12
ELL
teachers
report
that
they
lack
information
about
students
prior
educational
experiences,
which
would
be
helpful
in
determining
the
academic
needs
of
the
student.
There
is
no
procedure
for
acquiring
this
information
from
parents
of
ELL
students.
Program
information
K-12
Families
starting
school
in
the
middle
of
the
school
year
need
more
support
in
adjusting
to
school
procedures,
as
school
is
in
full
swing,
and
orientation
to
the
school
or
grade
level
takes
place
at
the
beginning
of
the
year.
Program
information

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Next
Steps
Culture
and
Community

Determine
which
families
have
difficulty
getting
information
about
the
schools
and
the
ELL
program.
Investigate
innovative
ways
to
communicate
with
families.
Determine
what
information
teachers
need
about
the
background
of
students
in
order
to
provide
targeted
support.
Determine
what
the
role
of
the
ELL
program
should
be
in
promoting
celebration
of
cultures
in
the
school
building.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
PART
III:
Phase
I
Information/Data
Sources

In
order
to
determine
areas
of
program
strength
and
areas
for
program
improvement,
the
Program
Review
Committee
examined
information
and
data
from
a
number
of
sources.
A
description
of
these
sources
is
provided
below.
All
of
the
data
and
findings
are
on
file
in
the
Office
of
Teaching
and
Learning
A.
Program
Information
(provided
by
the
ELL
Program
Coordinator)
ELL
Program
Glossary

Program
Overview

Powerpoint
presentation
with
handouts)
Program
Descriptions
and
Goals
for
English
Language
Learners
(ELLs)
Enrollment

October
1,
2008
SIMS
reports
for
2007
and
2008
-
chart
of
Limited
English
Proficient
students
by
language
Group
Enrollment
Memorandum
12/12/08
detailing
growth
in
Brookline s
ELL
population
FTEs
and
student
enrollment
Program
Entry/Exit

PSB
ELL
Program
Entry
Procedures
and
Exit
Criteria
ELL
Program
Entry
and
Exit
flow
chart
ELL
Program
Reclassification/Exit
Form
Summary
overview
of
DESE
Comprehensive
Review
Findings
for
ELE
(conducted
in
2008)
;
approved
DESE
corrective
action
plan.
ELL
Corrective
Actions
Implementation
Overview
(as
of
February
2009
and
updated
May
2009)
SEI
plan,
including
list
of
Categories
1-
4
SEI
Upcoming
Courses
ELL
Students
at
BHS

ELL
Elective
Course
Selections
at
BHS
2008-
2009
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
ELL
Budget
Information

ELL
Budget
Overview
2001-
2009
Information
on
Title
III
grant
ELL
Curriculum
(Grade
5/
6
example)

Concepts/Skills
to
be
Learned
Instructional
Activities/Strategies
Materials/Resources
Assessment
B.
Student
Achievement
Data
ELL
student
testing
Calendar
2008-
2009
District
summary
report
(Grades
3-
8
and
10,
MEPA
2008)
overview
of
how
ELL
students
performed
on
the
spring
2008
MEPA
(Massachusetts
English
Proficiency
Assessment)
,
district
and
individual
school.
MELA-
O
assessment
matrix
the
rubric
used
to
assess
oral
proficiency
in
English
for
ELL
students
(administered
in
the
spring)
.
Descriptions
of
levels
1-
5
on
comprehension
and
production.
Massachusetts
English
Proficiency
Assessment
tests
(MEPA)
results
for
Brookline
2008.
Shows
the
scores
in
listening
and
speaking,
as
well
as
reading
and
writing
in
English
District
summary
report
(Grades
3-
8
and
10,
MCAS
2008)
overview
of
how
ELL
students
performed
on
the
most
recent
MCAS
exam
in
English
Language
Arts
and
Math.
2008
Annual
Measurable
Achievement
Objectives
for
LEP
students
(AMAO
Reports)
for
the
state
and
the
district
an
indicator
of
whether
the
district s
ELL
students
as
a
group
are
making
adequate
yearly
progress
(towards
a
progress
target
determined
by
the
state
for
the
district.
)
District
Multi-
Test
Frequency
Distribution
Report
by
Raw
Score
(Grades
3-
8
and
10,
MCAS
2008)
shows
how
ELL
student
performance
is
distributed
across
a
grade;
ex:
the
%
of
students
who
scored
at
least
40
of
a
possible
80
on
the
ELA
MCAS
exam.
District
Objectives
summary
report
(Grades
3-
8
and
10,
MCAS
2008)
shows
the
%
of
Brookline
ELL
students
scoring
correctly
on
Reading
and
Mathematics
objectives/strands
in
comparison
to
the
%
of
ELL
students
in
the
state
who
scored
correctly,
and
the
difference
between
the
two
scores.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
MCAS
item
Analysis
for
ELL
students
(Grades
3-
8
and
10,
MCAS
2008)
in
English
Language
Arts
and
Math
shows
the
%
of
students
who
answers
individual
items
correctly,
indicating
what
types
of
problems
(i.e.
,
open
response,
multiple
choice)
students
do
well
on
and
do
poorly
on.
Massachusetts
School
and
District
Profiles
2008
Annual
Measurable
Achievement
Objectives
(AMAOs)
comparison
to
other
districts
C.
Qualitative
Data
Report
(Dr.
Julie
Coppola)
Dr.
Julie
Coppola,
BU
School
of
Education,
was
hired
to
gather
and
summarize
perception
data
from
a
variety
of
stakeholder
groups:
parents,
teachers
and
administrators.
The
summative
report
contains
findings
based
only
on
the
data
gathered
by
Dr.
Coppola.
(An
executive
summary
is
contained
in
this
report
as
Appendix
?
)
The
full
report
is
available
from
the
Office
of
Teaching
and
Learning
upon
request.

All
information
gathered
by
Dr.
Coppola
is
considered
perception
data.
It
provides
information
about
the
stakeholder
opinions
based
on
personal
experiences.
Data
was
collected
through
the
use
of
focus
groups
and
surveys
as
follows:
o
On-
line
survey
of
Brookline
teachers
o
Survey
of
parents/guardians
of
children
in
the
ELL
program.
This
survey
was
available
on-
line
and
in
hard
copy.
Hard
copies
were
translated
into
our
6
major
languages.
o
Seven
focus
groups:
principals,
K-
8
ELL
Program
teachers,
9-12
ELL
Program
teachers,
Special
Education
teachers,
Classroom
teachers
and
literacy
specialists,
Curriculum
Coordinators,
and
Parents
of
ELL
students.
Parents
participating
in
the
focus
group
were
those
who
responded
to
an
e-
mail
invitation
to
attend.
(Names
for
the
e-
mail
listing
were
comprised
of
400+
parents
who
replied
to
an
invitation
(sent
to
every
home)
to
be
put
on
a
list
to
be
contacted
about
focus
group
participation
in
early
September.
)
D.
Information
gathered
or
generated
by
the
committee
or
coordinators
Committee
list
of
observations
and
perceptions,
challenges,
and
questions
about
the
program
Committee
list
of
desired
vision
elements
Committee
list
of
questions
for
stakeholder
group
E.
Background
and
research-
based
information
Powerpoint
overview
of
ELL
considerations
by
Dr.
Julie
Coppola
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Sheltered
English
Instruction
(ERIC
Digest
document,
1988)
Teaching
English
Language
Learners:
What
the
Research
Does
and
Does
Not
Say
(
American
Educator,
Summer
2008)
The
ESL
Standards
Bridging
the
Academic
Gap
for
English
Language
Learners
(ERIC
Digest
document,
2000)
An
Introduction
to
Meeting
the
Needs
of
English
Language
Learners
(2004)
Stages
of
Second
Language
Acquisition
(everythingESL.net)
What
Research
Says
about
Effective
Strategies
for
ELL
Students
(nwrel.org)
Sampling
of
Vision
statements
from
other
districts
and
national
organizations
o
MATSOL
Massachusetts
Association
of
English
to
Speakers
of
Other
Languages
o
TESOL
-
Teachers
of
English
to
Speakers
of
Other
Languages
o
University
of
Massachusetts,
Amherst
o
Flint
Hills
School
District
o
Paso
Robles
Public
Schools
o
Chicago
Public
Schools
o
Douglas
County,
CO
School
District
o
Cougar
Elementary
School,
Manassas
Park,
Virginia
o
Waller
Independent
School
District
(Texas)
o
Spring
Branch
Independent
School
District
o
British
International
School
o
Janesville
School
District
(Wisconsin)
o
State
of
Tennessee
Department
of
Education
o
Brockton
Public
Schools
(MA)
o
Bunker
Hill
Community
College
(MA)
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Part
IV:
Appendices

Appendix
a
Executive
Summary
from
report
by
Dr.
Julie
Coppola
Appendix
b
AMAO
Report
Appendix
c
-
FTEs
and
student
enrollment
Appendix
d
ELL
Program
Funding
over
Time
Appendix
e
ELL
MCAS
performance

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Appendix
a:
Perception
data
gathered
by
Dr.
Julia
Coppola:
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY

Executive
Summary

The
purpose
of
this
report
is
to
provide
the
results
of
one
component
of
Phase
I
English
Language
Learners
(ELL)
Program
Review.
During
Phase
I,
Julie
Coppola,
serving
as
Outside
Data
Gatherer,
collected
and
analyzed
quantitative
and
qualitative
data
to
achieve
three
main
goals:
(a)
identify
administrator,
teacher,
and
parent
perceptions
of
Program
strengths,

(b)
identify
areas
that
administrators,
teachers,
and
parents
believe
deserve
attention
to
ensure
Program
improvement,
and
(c)
present
recommendations
for
continued
Program
development
that
emerged
from
the
data
to
the
Program
Review
Committee.
The
Outside
Data
Gatherer
(a)
designed
and
piloted
teacher
and
parent
surveys
in
consultation
with
the
ELL
Program
Review
Committee,
(b)
conducted
teacher
and
parent
surveys
and
focus
groups
with
all
stakeholders,
and
(c)
analyzed
data
to
determine
stakeholders
perceptions
of
program
strengths
and
needs
and
inform
recommendations
for
best
next
steps.
Data
sources
included:
Surveys
Number
of
responses

Teacher
Survey
-
Online
n
=
232
Parent/Guardian
Survey
-
Online
n
=
91
Parent/Guardian
Survey
Paper*
n
=
101
Focus
Groups
Number
of
participants

Principals
n
=
9
Curriculum
coordinators
n
=
13
Classroom
teachers
K-12
n=
8
ELL
teachers
K-
8
n=
13
ELL
teachers
9-12
n=
4
Special
Education
staff
n
=
30
Parents/Guardians
n
=
7
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
In
surveys
and
in
focus
groups,
Brookline
Public
Schools
parents,
teachers,
and
administrators
expressed
satisfaction
with
several
aspects
of
the
ELL
Program.
Stakeholders
reported:

There
is
strong
Program
leadership.
There
is
ongoing
monitoring
of
student
progress
and
achievement.
ELL
staff
members
provide
a
strong
sense
of
community
among
students
who
receive
ELL
services
at
each
school.
This
is
particularly
evident
for
those
students
who
receive
native-
language
support
services.
ELL
staff
members
support
schools
in
their
efforts
to
actively
and
openly
demonstrate
respect
for
and
appreciation
of
the
many
different
languages
and
cultures
represented
by
ELL
students
and
their
families.
ELL
staff
members
support
schools
in
their
efforts
to
actively
and
openly
demonstrate
that
all
students
enrolled
in
the
ELL
program
and
their
families
are
welcome,
valuable,
and
contributing
members
of
the
Brookline
Public
Schools.
All
groups
identified
areas
they
believe
deserved
attention
to
improve
parent,
teacher,
and
administrator
satisfaction
and
ultimately
student
achievement.
These
are
(a)
professional
development
for
teaching
English
language
learners,
(b)
ELL
Program
curriculum
and
delivery
of
ELL
instruction,
and
(c)
communicating
with
families.

Professional
Development

Lack
of
formal
training
for
teaching
English
language
learners
is
evident
at
all
grade
levels
and
in
all
content
and
specialist
areas.
Overall,
teachers
in
the
Brookline
Public
Schools
report
they
are
not
confident
about
their
abilities
to
teach
English
language
learners.
Teachers
express
a
desire
for
professional
development
for
teaching
English
language
learners
that
is
of
higher
quality
than
state-
mandated
category
training.
There
has
been
little
integration
of
ELL
staff
in
district-
wide
professional
development
opportunities
such
as
those
offered
in
literacy
or
in
the
content
areas.
ELL
Program
Curriculum
and
Delivery
of
Instruction

Administrators,
general
education,
content
area
and
special
education
teachers,
and
specialists
report
they
lack
information
about
the
ELL
Program s
academic
goals,
objectives,
and
services.
There
is
a
perceived
lack
of
consistency
in
the
delivery
of
the
ELL
Program
services
across
all
schools.
There
is
a
perceived
need
for
stronger
supervision
of
ELL
staff
as
one
way
to
promote
consistency
in
the
delivery
of
ELL
Program
services
across
all
schools.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
There
is
a
perceived
need
for
stronger
articulation
of
ELL
Program
entrance
and
exit
criteria.
There
is
a
perceived
need
for
stronger
articulation
of
criteria
within
and
between
language
proficiency
levels.
Overall,
despite
an
identified
need
and
an
expressed
desire
for
collaboration
between
ELL
teachers
and
their
general
education,
content
area,
special
education,
and
specialist
colleagues,
there
are
very
limited
opportunities
to
collaborate.
Although
there
are
exceptions,
teachers,
specialists,
and
administrators
report
collaboration
most
often
occurs
at
the
discretion
of
individual
teachers
and
is
generally
fleeting
and
informal
in
nature.
Stakeholders
report
that
more
attention
must
be
paid
to
meeting
the
academic
(language,
literacy,
and
content
area)
needs
of
students
who
(a)
are
in
the
beginning
stages
of
learning
English,
(b)
have
exited
the
ELL
Program
and
no
longer
receive
support
services,
or
(c)
have
experienced
interrupted
formal
schooling.
Students
pull-
out
schedules
for
ELL
and
native-
language
support
instruction
and
strong
affiliation
with
their
ELL
peer
group
when
native-
language
support
services
are
available
are
viewed
as
having
the
potential
to
limit
students
opportunities
to
integrate
academically
and
socially
in
their
K-
8
schools
and
classrooms.
Overall,
there
is
a
perception
that
students
do
not
receive
the
recommended
amount
of
instructional
time
with
the
ELL
teacher.
ELL
teachers
report
that
they
need
easier
access
to
grade-
level
materials
to
better
support
their
students.
All
general
education,
content
area,
and
special
education
teachers,
and
specialists
report
that
they
need
easier
access
to
materials
that
support
English
language
learners.
There
is
a
perceived
need
to
increase
the
number
of
sheltered-
content
classes
offered
at
Brookline
High
School
and
to
provide
appropriate
learning
experiences
for
those
students
who
have
experienced
interrupted
formal
schooling.
Communicating
with
Families

Lack
of
interpreters
and
timely
translation
services
is
an
ongoing
concern
for
parents,
teachers,
and
administrators.
Recommendations

The
following
recommendations
for
continued
ELL
Program
improvement
and
student
success
emerged
from
the
survey
and
focus
group
data:

Support
all
administrators
and
teachers
in
their
efforts
to
engage
in
professional
development
for
teaching
English
language
learners
by
providing
easier
access
to
high-
quality
training
opportunities.
Provide
all
stakeholders
with
more
information
about
the
ELL
Program s
goals,
services,
and
objectives.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Provide
all
stakeholders
with
better
evidence
of
the
type
of
ELL
instruction
students
receive.
Determine
if
the
current
approach
to
delivering
ELL
instruction
is
efficient
and
effective.
Examine
the
number
of
program
models
used
to
deliver
ELL
instruction
and
determine
the
efficacy
of
each
model.
In
particular,
revisit
the
goals
of
and
the
need
for
the
ELL/native-
language
support
programs
in
K-
8
schools.
Formalize
opportunities
for
general
education
and
ELL
staff
to
(a)
participate
in
mutually
beneficial
professional
development
opportunities
and
(b)
co-
plan
assessment
and
instruction
for
students
who
receive
ELL
Program
services.
Investigate
co-or
team-
teaching
models
of
instruction
for
teaching
English
language
learners
at
all
grade
levels
and
in
all
content
areas
as
one
way
to
meet
the
expressed
need
for
more
collaboration
between
ELL
teachers
and
other
teaching
staff.
Promote
English
language
learners
access
to
grade-
level
content
at
Brookline
High
School
by
increasing
the
number
of
sheltered
content
classes.
Increase
access
to
interpreter
and
translation
services
to
ensure
timely
exchange
of
information
between
home
and
school.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Appendix
b
2008
AMAO
reports

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Appendix
c
FTEs
and
Student
Enrollment

English Language Learners Program 2008-2009

As of October 1, 2008
School
Teacher
FTEs
Students
Baker
(Korean ELL)
Kirsztajn
1.0
33
Moiseyeva
1.0
31
Chong
1.0 35
Kim
0.7 34
Devotion
(Hebrew ELL)
DiPierro
1.0
28
Stavridis
0.4 29
Jaret
1.0 22
Neeman-Schubert 1.0
24
Driscoll
(Russian ELL)
Levitina
1.0
32
Heath
Levine
0.4
7
Lawrence
(Japanese ELL)
Marbet
1.0
57
Fell
0.4 21
Wolff
1.0 44
1.0 52
Lincoln
(Japanese ELL)
Fell
0.6
22
Thompson
1.0
42
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Pierce
(Chinese ELL)
Tang
1.0
22
Yu
1.0 19
Levine
0.6 19
Runkle
(Spanish ELL)
Marrero
1.0
28
Stavridis
0.4 15
High School
Frost
1.0
28
Babitskaya
1.0
24
Frydman
0.25 19
Hyett
0.05 N/A
Davis
0.6 N/A
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Appendix
d
ELL
Program
Funding
over
Time

English Language Learners

General Funds Budget Overview: 2002-2009
1
2
3
4
5
School Year
# of LEP
students enrolled
General Funds*
FTEs**
District Teacher/Student
Ratio
2002-2003
552
$1,534,749
(adjusted)
27.05
1:
20
2003-2004
395
$1,435,458
(adjusted)
24.05
1:
16
2004-2005
401
$1,427,152
(adjusted)
22.05
1:
17
2005-2006
369
$1,397,174
(adjusted)
21.9
1:
17
2006-2007
454
$1,392,625
(adjusted)
21.25
1:
21
2007-2008
442
$1,434,335
(adjusted)
20.3
1:
22
2008-2009
536
$1,585,977
(adjusted)
20.4
1:
26
*
Annual budget increases reflect lane advancements, and collective bargaining inc
reases. No increases have
been made to any line other than personnel.
** FTEs include all instructional staff (teachers
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
English Language Learners
Title III Grant Budget Overview: 2002-2009
1
2
3
4
5
School Year
Title III Allocation*
# of students on
which
the allocation
was
determined
Actual # of
students enrolled
Per Pupil
Allocation
Expected
Actual
2002-2003
$75,012
549
552
$136.63
$135.89
2003-2004
$86,470
552
395
$156.65
$218.91
2004-2005
$84,427
395
401
$213.74
$228.80
2005-2006
$100,162
401
369
$249.78
$271.44
2006-2007
$82,601
369
454
$223.85
$181.94
2007-2008
$94,283
454
442
$207.67
$213.31
2008-2009
$105,547
442
536
$238.79
$196.92
*
Title III monies are not intended to fund
staff salaries.
English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009
Appendix
e
MCAS
Student
Achievement
by
ELL
students
(
2008)

Number
of
Students
Taking
Each
2008
MCAS
Test

Grade
ELA
Math
LEP
Students
All
Students
LEP
Students
All
Students
3
16
411
19
415
4
17
414
21
421
5
12
423
12
423
6
10
398
16
407
7
6
373
6
371
8
17
410
17
412
10
5
425
12
426

Percentage
of
Students
Reaching
Proficiency
in
Each
2008
MCAS
Test

Grade
ELA
Math
LEP
Students
All
Students
LEP
Students
All
Students
3
31
74
68
80
4
29
66
43
64
5
67
83
58
74
6
60
86
63
80
7
50
91
83
73
8
47
91
53
76
10
60
87
67
83

English
Language
Learner Program Review
Phase I Report, June 2009